Main Page     Feedback?

Proposed   administrative   procedure  
LM.02   :   Direct   Vote   in   Assembly

Purpose : Reduce nexusproneness in law-making at State level

  1. Background
  2. Existing Law Making Process in Assembly
  3. Flaws in the existing law-making procedure
  4. Proposed ADDITIONAL procedure
  5. Details
  6. FAQs on LM.02 (and LM.03)
  7. Can the judges High/Supreme Court declare LM.02 as unconstitutional?
  8. Draft for LM.02
  9. Letter to MLA


The purpose is to make India's administration/courts, and hence economy, at par with West. How? We would need several laws. LM.02 is the FIRST of these proposed laws. LM.02 will not only improve law-making at Assembly level, but would also bootstrap a process that would result into passing 10s of good laws.

The   Existing   Law   Making   Process   in   the   Assembly
  1. A state is divided in 50-400 Constituency, with each constutuency having 1 MLA.

  2. The citizen-voters residing in a Constituency elect 1 MLA for a period of 5 years.

  3. Any MLA can present a Draft (Bill) in the Assembly. The Speaker of the Assembly may or may not schedule a voting date on the Bill. If the voting date is scheduled, each Councilor can register his YES/NO on the bill.

  4. If majority of the MLAs approve the Bill, the Bill is sent to the Givernor for approval. After his approval, it becomes a law in that State.

Flaws   in   the   Existing   Law-Making   Procedure

Proposed Solution : #LM.02 --- Partial Direct Vote in Assembly

The summary of the procedure LM.02 is as follow
  1. Any citizen can pay a fee and present a bill to the Speaker of the Assembly

  2. The citizens can pay a small fee, say Rs 3, and register YES/NO on that bill. The registration of YES/NO will NOT be confidential.

  3. The MLA's YES/NO will count ONLY for those who have NOT registered their YES/NO. If the MLA does NOT vote, his vote is taken as NO.

Details of #LM.02

The details are as follows
  1. The District Collector will serve as Registrar for this procedure.

  2. Any person can pay a fee of say Rs 20000/- , propose a Bill (Draft)to the Speaker and obtain a serial number.

  3. Within next 60 days, any citizen voter can go to the Registrar's office (or his clerk's office), pay a fee of Rs 2 to Rs 5, show his voter-ID or ration card, specify the serial number of the Bill, and register his YES/NO on the Bill.

  4. The clerk will enter the citizen's ID number, Bills proposal number, the citizen's choice (YES/NO) etc into the computer and the computer will print 2 reciept. The clerk will give one reciept to the citizen and on the other reciept, he will take the citizen's finger print and keep it in the records. A sample of the reciept is shown below

    SAMPLE   layout   of   the Reciept
      that   the   citizen   will   get   when   he   registers   his   YES/NO   on   a   Bill

    Registration of YES/NO
    (Fee : Rs 3)
    Dear Speaker, 
            I advice you to efficvely consider my 
    opinion on the following bill. ---  The Citizen.  
           Reciept Number  3245-345-01                 
                     Date  28/03/2001
    Citizen's Card Number  67897899  
           Citizenís Name  Prakash Mehta   
           Proposal Number  2002-878   
            Proposal Title  EDU.01 - New Education System
                  My vote YES
    Clerkís name, number, sign 
          Suresh Pandya/67-092/S Pandya 
    Citizenís Thumb Print  

  5. A citizen, within the 60 day period can also change the vote anytime anyday after paying Rs 5 fee.

  6. For each Bill, for each Assembly constituency, the Registrar will publish the statements on Web everyday or every week, showing entries of those citizens who have registered their YES/NO. The entries will be sorted by ration card number sand the reciept numbers.

    SAMPLE of the List that will be generated

    Proposal Number : 2002-878
    Proposal Title  : #EDU.01 -- New Education System
    Constituency Number : 13/182
    Constituency Name   : Shahpur - Gujarat
    Number of voters : 145,267
    Number of citizens who had Registered YES as of Yesterday  13,354   
    Number of citizens who had Registered NO  as of Yesterday   6,865
    Number of citizens who had Registered YES as of Today          10   
    Number of citizens who had Registered NO  as of Today           5
    Number of citizens who changed their  YES to NO                 2
    Number of citizens who changed their  NO  to YES                1
    Number of YESes as of Today  = 13354 - 2 + 10           =  12,362
    Number of   NOs as of Today  =  6865 - 1 +  5           =   6,869
    Citizens who Registered their Opinions as YES 
           Card No        Name             Reciept No  Previous Opinion
     1     2158112      Divan, Sudhir         21851        -
     2     2350222      Mehta, Vimal          58783        -  
     3     2885461      Jain, Bimal           40203        - 
     4     3156068      Patel, Suhas          13720        -
     5     3737486      Khan, Suhel           42995        NO
     6     4040625      Sai, Samir            36446        - 
     7     4514433      Shankar, P            56375        -
     8     4759652      Khan, Suleman         57412        NO
     9     5176682      Seth, Vineet          99653        -
    10     5311764      Singh, Jasvinder      19675        -
    Citizens who Registered their Opinions as NO 
           Card No        Name               Reciept No  Previous Opinion
     1     4020310      Khan, Akbar            14964        -
     2     4210275      Holkar, Babu           19675       YES
     3     4633510      Ramesh, P              42995        -
     4     5637330      Divakar, Sudhir        57412        -
     5     5652714      Patel, Navinchandra    74898        -

  7. Within 30 days after presenting the proposal, the MLA may register his YES/NO on the proposal by visiting the speaker in his chamber. There will no general meeting. If a Councilor does NOT register his YES/NO, the Speaker will take it as a NO.

  8. On the 61st day, the Speaker will count votes as follows

    1. Say a constituency has 100,000 voters
    2. Say 25,000 (25%) has registered a YES
    3. Say 5,000 (5%) has registered a NO
    4. Then 30% citizen-voters have already registered their YES/NO, and thus the MLA has moral right to represent ONLY the remaining 70%. So the Councilor votes' weight will be only 70%. So
      • if the MLA votes YES, it will be 70% + 25% = 95% YES and 5% NO from that Constituency
      • if the MLA votes NO, it will be 25% YES and 70% + 5% = 75% NO from that Constituency
      • if the MLA DOES NOT vote, his vote will be taken as a NO and so it will 25% YES and 5% + 70% = 75% NO from that Constituency
    5. The Speaker will add the YES-fraction and NO-fraction of all the constituencies.

  9. If the YES-fraction exceeeds NO-fraction, then the Speaker will declare the Bill as passed.

     Thus citizens an EFFECTIVELY participate in the law-making process. This will drastically increase nexuslessness in the law-making process, and no one can possibly have nexuses with millions of citizens. This will also reduce the value of MLAs and thus corruption in his profession. By all means, the #LM.02 decreases political inequality and thus increases Democraticness in the law making process at State level.

Relevent and Irrelevent FAQs on LM.02 (and LM.03)

     Since May-2001, I have been campaigning to get LM.02 passed in Gujarat Assembly. During my presentations, I faced several relevent and irrelevent (=academic) questions. I will state the questions as well as answers, and also state why I think some of the questions are irrelevent.

      Following are some of the questions
  1. __   Main plus point of LM.02
  2. __   Arent citizens sucepptible to bribery?
  3. __   Will citizens use this mechanism at all?
  4. __   Isnt LM.02 same as Direct Democracy?
  5. __   Isnt LM.02 same as referendum?
  6. __   What about the cost of LM.02?
  7. __   Is Rs 3/- sufficient to cover the administrative cost of registering YES/NO?
  8. __   Can it happen that an "unsafe" proposal "sneak-in" due to LM.02?
  9. __   Isnt it unfair that MLA's vote has such a high weightage?
  10. __   Can laws be made by mere YES/NO votes?
  11. __   Are citizens capable of deciding on "complex" laws?
  12. __   Why not just ablosh Assembly and Parliament?

  1. The main plus point of LM.02
    • LM.02 reduces nexusproneness in law making. One can have nexuses with few 100 MLAs, but it is litellay impossible to have nexuses wil lakhs and crores of citizens, who have powers to register YES/NO in LM.02. So the YES/NOs of MLAs may or may not be due to nexuses, but the YES/NO from citizens, if any, will be mostly nexusless YES/NO. This nexuslessness will improve objectivity and fairness in law-making.
    • since citizens have less nexuses, they will have more time to spare to debate and reason on law-making. This will further improve law-making in India.
    • Other plus points are mere derivates of above two.

  2. Arent citizens sucepptible to bribery?
    Answer :
    It is NOT possible for lobbyists to bribe millions of citizens. But it is indeed possible for them to cover/bribe a handful of party leaders and a few MLAs. So by all means, LM.02 are far far less corruption prone then existing 100% indirect mechanisms.
    Is this a relevant question? No, it is NOT. A citizen has MORAL right to register his YES/NO in Assembly/Parliament and it is a moral binding on the state to pass/fail Bills as per the head count, WITHOUT questioing the motives of the voters.

  3. Will citizens use this mechanism at all? If yes, how many citizens will use this mechanism? Are people conscious enough that they will use this mechanism to make laws?
    Answer :
    When Dr. Ambedkar had proposed Universal Suffrage i.e. every citizen be allowed to cast vote in an election irrespective of birth, education level, property he owns etc, Dr Rajendra Prasad and many snobbish Congressmen had rejected his proposal on the same basis --- that most "common men" are so to say stupid or unaware and so only educated and propertied persons should be have power to vote. Today, we know that it is uneducated and poor also use their right to vote and that the candidates they elect, with due disrespect, are far better than the people we see in appointed positions like IAS and judiciary. So there is NO merit in the argument that uneducated and illiterate persons are "less aware". They are as much aware of reality as the so called educated folks. And they DO care about improving the nation, and they care MORE than educated ones who have ways and means to escape out of the country.
    Is this question relevent?
    No. The question is NOT relevent. Whether a person used his right to vote of register YES/NO is his decision, and cant be anyone's MORAL/LEGAL concern.

  4. Is LM.02 (i.e. Partial Direct Vote in Assembly) same as Direct Democracy?
    Answer :
    NO. It is NOT the same . For two main reasons. First, Direct Democracy is a mere concept, where as LM.02 is a detailed procedure which defines each and every logistic and administrative part. Second, in Direct Democracy, the Representative's vote's value is same as that of a common citizen; whereas, in LM.02, the weight of MLA's vote equals all the citizens who have chosen NOT to register their YES.
    LM.02 is a cross between Direct and Indirect Law Making. LM.02 is neighter 100% Direct as it is in case of referendum, and it is NOT 100% Indirect as is the case today. It is X% Direct, and (100 - X%) Indirect. What is X? It is fraction of citizens who chose to have and register their YES/NO. It may be anywhere from 0% to 100%, depending on the place, time and issue.
    Is this question relevent?
    No, it is NOT. A proposal in administration should be questioned on the basis of its logistic, harm it may do or good it may cause. Comparing it with another vaguely defined concept is irrelevent=academic exercise

  5. Isnt LM.02 same as referendum?
    Answer :
    NO. LM.02 is NOT same as referendum. Following are the main differences
    (Partial Direct Vote in Assembly)
    In Partial Direct Vote in Assembly, BOTH, the citizens and MLAs register their YES/NO and an MLA's vote's weight is equal to % of citizens who have NOT registered their YES/NO. In a referendum, an MLA's votes weight is same is that of ordinary citizen
    Proposed procedure LM.02 is a cross product of 100% Indirect Voting which we see today and a referdum -
    In LM.02, a citizen who has trust in MLA does NOT have to run to booth to register his YES/NO on a bill. In refendum, even if a citizen has faith in his representative, he has rto run to booth or else the opposing view point may win
    The cost of registering YES/NO is borne by the citizen who is registering, and he pays no cost if he doesnt register his YES/NO The cost is borne by the "State", i.e. a citizens pays whether he registers his YES/NO or he doesnt
    Is this question relevent?
    No, it is NOT. A proposal in administration should be questioned on the basis of its logistic, harm it may do or good it may cause. Comparing it with another procedure, which does a DIFFERENT task, is an irrelevent exercise.

  6. What about the cost of LM.02?
    LM.02 uses a generic procedures which I have defined and termed as RLPP i.e. Reciept-List Printing Procedure. The procedure is cost-effective in all cases. For the cost details of RLPP, please click here. In the specific case of LM.02, the procedure *is* cost-effective as
    • The cost burden on the State i.e. the Government is ZERO.
    • All the cost is covered by Rs 5000/- to Rs 50,000/- fee that the Bill submitter pays and Rs 2/- to Rs 5/- fee that the citizen pays at the time of registering his YES/NO.
    • So the burden in the non-participating citizens is zero.
    • So the fact that citizen is paying fee and registering YES/NO *proves* that it was cost-effective for him.
    The situation is analogous to free market, where if a person is willingly buying an item, he must be doing so as the benefit of that item is equal to or more than the cost, which proves that the item was indeed cost-effective.
    Is this question relevent ?
    Yes, it is. A proposal in administration MUST be questioned to ensure that Govt (=citizenry) does not end up bearing the burden of executing the procedures

  7. Is Rs 5/- sufficient to cover the administrative cost of registering YES/NO?
    Answer :
    Yes. When a citizen approaces a clerk, with a piece of paper on which he has written Bill number and his YES/NO preference, the clerk has to enter Bill number, citizen's ration card number and YES/NO, and give the printed reciept to the citizen. The whole process will take LESS than say 4 minutes. So a temeperory clerk on contract working 8 hours a day can easily dispense 100-120 reciepts per day. If fee is set at Rs 3/- per YES/NO registration, the fee collected will be Rs 300/- to Rs 360 per day per clerk which will be more than sufficient to cover ALL the costs including the salary of the clerk, rent of the PC/printer and the stationary costs. Also, the registrar can issue IDs with barcode or magnetic strips so that the clerk DOES NOT need to input the citizen's ID number manually. This will further reduce the input time to less than 2 minutes. Subsequently, the registrar can also instal an automated terminal with a touch screen and a reciept printer that will completely eliminate the need of the clerk. This will reduce the expense to below Re 1/- per YES/NO registration. So answer in short is YES, a Rs 2 to Rs 3 fee is MORE than sufficient to cover the cost of registering YES/NO.
    Is this question relevant?
    Yes. Any question on cost-estimate is relevant.

  8. Can it happen that an proposal that is NOT acceptable to citizens as well as MLAs would "sneak-in" due to LM.02?
    Answer :
    No. If a proposal get through LM.02, at least one of the two things must have happened
    • Eighter a large number of citizens registered YES
    • A large number of citizens didnt vote and a alarge number of MLAs voted YES
    For, if a MLA does NOT vote, his vote is taken as a NO. And if a citizen does NOT vote, his vote is taken as per the vote of the MLA. Thus it cant happen that an unpopular proposal will "sneak through" the LM.02.
    Is this question relevant?
    Yes. A proposal in administration must be self-protected against a use not in agreement with public will.

  9. Say there are 100,000 citizens in a Constituency. Say 10000 register a YES and 20000 register a NO. Then MLA's vote will have weightage of 70%. Isnt it unfair that MLA's vote has such a high weightage?
    Answer :
    No it isnt, as the citizen's weight who didnt vote should be indeed zero, and there is NOTHING unfair if MLA registers his opinion on behalf of him. Also, it is fairer 100% indirect law making process used today, where MLA's opinion on a bill carries 100% weight and a citizen's opinion on a bill carries 0% weightage, even if the citizen is willing to register his opinion. Besides, MLA has legally and legitimately obtained mandate of citizens to represent himself.
    Is this question relevent?
    Yes it is. It asks for the apparent drawback of the proposed procedure, (which of course is NOT a drawback).

  10. The proposal LM.02 are "bad" as they leave too much power in the hands of MLAs etc
    Answer :
    LM.02 REDUCE MLAs' powers. And the power that LM.02 leave in the hands of the representatives *is* legitimate as the MLA is duely elected by the citizens.

  11. Can laws be made by mere YES/NO votes?
    Answer :
    YES. As of today, ALL laws are eventually made or repealed by YES/NO votes as registered by MLAs and after a head count. In fact, ALL decisions at the end of the day in EVERY known administrative bodies are based on a YES or a NO. There is no escape from YES/NO.
    Is this question relevent? : NO. LM.02 deals transferring some of the powers of MLAs DIRECTLY into hands of citizens. The limitations of that power is non-issue.

  12. Are citizens capable of deciding YES/NO on "complex" laws?
    Answer :
    Yes, in general, most laws *are* simple enpough that most citizens can decide their mind. And in case, a common does not have detailed knopwledge about a specific Bill, he can always vote as per the advice of the experts he has faith in. And in worst case, he can leave the matter to his MLA by simply not voting on the Bill. So whether a citizen is capable of voting on a Bill or not is a mute point --- if he can make up his mind, he would vote or else he would let his MLA vote for him.
    Is this question relevent? : NO. If a person does NOT have faith in citizenry, he should leave the country. But he has NO right to question the integrity and ability of the citizenry.

  13. The whole idea of allowing citizens to directly register YES/NO is based on the fact that MLAs are corrupt and do not represent citizens' wishes, and so citizens should be allowed to register their YES/NO directly. If so, why not just ablish Assembly and Parliament?
    Answer :
    If you want to abolish the Assembly etc or further reduce the powers of MLAs,, present draft a Bill to do so. AFTER reading the Bill, I will declare my YES/NO on it. No Bill, no talk.

    If you have any other question, please email the question to me at

Won't judges High/Supreme Court declare this law as unconstitutional?

A judge can do whatever do he likes. The judges in India's High Court have stooped low to the extent of going on mass strike, asking for wine/women over phone to a land mafia, and even GIVING bribes to get their sons/daughters appointed as magistrates. So there is no point in answering the question "can judges cancel this law?", as they can do whatever they like. The ONLY question I will answer is --- DOES the procedure LM.02 collide with Constitution and laws passed by Parliament? Answer is --- it does NOT. How?

Let me state LM.01 into 3 parts:
  1. Part-I : The Assembly allows MLAs to register fractional-YES i.e. MLA can say mere YES/NO, which would mean 100%-YES or 100%-NO,or he may say "x% YES, (100-x)% NO".
  2. Part-II : The Assembly allows citizens to register YES/NO in Talati's office.
  3. Part-III : The Assembly makes YES/NO of citizens binding on MLAs i.e. if 10% citizens have said YES, and 20% citizens have said NO, MLA's vote's YES-fraction must exceed 10% and must be below 80% and NO-fraction must exceed 20% and must be below 90%.
The above 3 parts make LM.02. Are they valid. YES. How? Now there are following things that come into picture while discussing validility of a law.
  1. Locus Standi -- file complaint ONLY of you are effected : Say the Parliament passes a law that "anyone who wears a while shirt, shall be fined Rs 100 first time, and on second offence, he will be impisoned for 1 year". Can this law be challanged in High/Supreme Court? Yes. But ONLY after a govt official ACTUALLY fines/arrest someone under this law, or at least sends notice or summons. Not until then. IOW, say GoI passed a law, but does NOT arrest/fine anyone under that law, the courts cant admit complaint against that law's logic.

  2. Only a victim can file complain : the concept of locus standii also says that ONLY the victim, or someone closely related, can file a complain;not anyone else. So say GoI passes a law that "those who wear white shirt will be imprisoned for 1 year", and say I wear white shirt, and policemen arrests me. Then ONLY I, or my close relative, can challage the law, not my neighbor. If unrelated person files a complaint, the court has no option but to dismiss it.

  3. Public Interest : The concept of Locus Standii is now a joke in Indian High/Supreme Courts. Under the so called "public interest", anyone can challange anyone. But here also, one needs to show that the law that is challanged violates public interests.

  4. Cause of challange --- violation of fundamental rights : No one can challange a law UNLESS he shows prima facie that law violates his, or someone else's, FUNDAMENTAL RIGHTS. Unless fundamental rights are violated, GoI's laws are valid in courts.

Now I will show that ALL the 3 parts are in agreement with Constitution of India.

  1. Part-I : As per existing Constitution, there is NOTHING wrong if MLAs are allowed to vote fractional-YES and fractional-NO. The existing law does NOT allow MLA to say "20% YES, 80% NO". But an Assembly can pass a law, that would enable MLA to say "x% YES and (100-x)% NO", and such a law would NOT violate Constitution. This law is in fact in sync with People's Representation Act; since MLA represents everyone in his Constituency, he is morally required to say YES/NO based on majority opinion, but this means he has to supress the minority vote. The law, that enables MLA to say "x% YES and (100-x)% NO" enables MLA to represent BOTH majority and minority. It is NOT unconstitutional in any way. Also, Part-I does NOT violate anyone's fundamental rights. So there is NO legal/constitunal basis on which courts can void Part-I. Further, say a person challanges Part-I using locus standii. This can be dismissed as no GoI official fines/arrests any citizen. So the complainer can ONLY complain using cuase of Public Interest. This again, has NO weightage, as public interest is NOT violated in anyway.

  2. Part-II : Lets say Assembly creates a system by which a citizen register YES/NO on a bill. Does this violate Constitution? No it doesnt. After all, MLA is to represent citizens in Assembly, and he indeed needs to know what % of his citizens want YES/NO on a bill. Also, citizens are allowed to register YES/NO, no one's fundamental rights are NOT violated. So again, there is no locus standii in the complaint.

  3. Part-III : Now making citizens' opinion binding on MLAs might violate MLA's previlieges, but it DOES NOT violate any citizens' fundamental rights. In fact, it INCREASES citizens' rights and powers. So no one, except an MLA, has a locus standii to file a complaint against this law. Now as far as an MLA goes, the MLA is REPRESENTATIVE. And it would be unbecoming of a representative, if he DOES NOT represent citizens YESes/NOs. So if LM.02 law forces him to represent the citizens, LM.02 is ONLY forcing him to do what is supposed to do, nothing more. Also, no private citizen can challange this on the basis of locus standii --- as no citizen is fines/arrested when MLA is forced to vote as per citizens' will. And court cant admit challange against "forcing the MLA to vote as per citizens' wish", as violation of public interest, as forcing MLA to vote as per citizens' wish is IN SYNCH with public interest.

The most important reason, why no High/Supreme court can LEGALLY admit any petition challanging LM.02, is that under LM.02, no officer is ever going to fine/arrest any citizen, or even send a summons or notice to a citizen. So no citizen will EVER have a locus standii to complaint against the law LM.02. And the complaint against LM.02 on basis of public interest is just ludicurous --- the law ALLOWS public to register YES/NO, and can do no damage to public.

Also, whether High/Supreme Court judges will allow a challange against LM.02, or not, and whether they will cancel LM.02 or not, is purely HYPOTHETICAL, as a sitting judge cannot opine, no one can opine on behalf of a judge and, ONLY after a WRITTEN complaint against the law is presented before the judge against LM.02, can judge take an action. And to a considerable extent, it would depend on the TEXT of the complaint. Unless one presents the text of the complaint, it is impossible to decide what the law says on the said complaint.

(eg. When a PIL was admitted in Supreme Court against Shankracharya's arrest by a third party, the plea was dismissed within minutes by judges, and judges gave ONLY one reason : let Shankracharya (or his lawyer or some related person) file a complaint, then we will we hear the plea; we wont hear third party's plea. Same way, when a private person files a complaint against LM.02 that it infringes on MLA's rights, the judge may dismiss the complain by citing that court will hear the plea if and when MLAs file a complaint.) Now it is certainly possible, that a LAW that is passed using LM.02 gets voided by courts, just as any law that is passed by Assembly may get voided by courts.

Interpretation of word "representative"

LM.02 basically forces the MLA to voteas per the wish of the citizens. This the JOB and the basic DUTY of a representative, and hence there is NOTHING unconstitutional about LM.02. So if the word is interpreted as "truthful representative of citizens", LM.02 is Constitutional and in agreement with People's Representative. But if the judge decides to interprete the word "representative" as "autocratic indvidual", then ONLY LM.02 is unconstitutional. But such interpretation is ridiculous at best. If judge interprets representative as "autocratic individual", the citizens should start a movement to expel such a judge, NOT change the Constitution.

What if High/Supeme Court judges void LM.02?

I have shown that LM.02 does NOT violate any citizen's fundamental rights such as right to life, right to liberty, right to free speech etc. Hence courts have NO moral/legal right label LM.02 as unconstitutional or void it. In fact, since no one can ever be arrested/fined under LM.02, no citizen has even slightest locus standii to complaint. And no citizen can challange LM.02 on the basis of public interest. So if some judges voids LM.02, the citizens MUST not amend the Constitution, as there is NO fault of Constitution, but citizens should start a mass movement to expel those judges.

judge's judgements also depend on public mood

In Oct-2004, an incident occured in Puna. Some 500-1000 men and women ran into a court room in broad day light, and kicked and punched a career criminal named Akku Yadav till he died. The men and women attcked this criminal, as, like myself, they had no faith in policemen, govt lawyers and the judges. The men and women rightly guessed that the policemen, govt lawyers and judges would ensure that criminal's acquittal, and the criminal will be back to rape and harass them once again. So they killed him right in the court. The policemen arrested some 5 women, and accused them of planning this murder. Next day, the women applied for the bail, and the judge refused to grant the bail. But within 1-2 hours, the judges agreed to grant the bail. Why?

When a person is accused of murder, and dead body is present, it is nearly impossible to get bail even within months. And even in ordinary allegations, getting bail takes days and sometimes weeks. How come these women got bail within 1 day, and within 1-2 hours after the judge had turned down the bail? Becuase an angry crowd of 500 inside the room, and crowd of some 2000 outside the room, had threatened the judge of on-the-spot murder, if he does NOT grant the bail. If I say that the threat worked, it would be contempt of court, but nevertheless I would POSITIVELY say that the threat worked, and IMO, the judge granted bail ONLY becuase of the crowd's threat of murder.

IOW, as of today, the judges' judgement depend sharply on the mood of the citizens, and the way they display their moods. So will judges declare LM.02 as unconstitutional? That will depend on the mood of citizens on the day of hearing and how they display their mood.

Draft for #LM.02

To enact the administrative procedure #LM.02 in a Assembly, a law needs to be passed in the Assembly. For the the EXACT Draft (Text) of the law, please click

Letter To MLA

To pressurize MLAs to pass this law in Assembly. I request the reader to send them a letter. Click here for the letter.

Next - What is Bootstrapping?